Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8160
- 8179)
8160. So far as the modelling is concerned,
that itself depends upon what you are modelling, which I call
the `inputs' to the modelling. Do you understand that?
(Mr Berryman) I certainly do.
8161. So far as those works, which I referred
to a moment ago, in the Bill are concerned, and we were looking
at pages 58 and 59, those Heathrow works and the Greenford works,
and I just took those as two examples, they were included in the
inputs to the model, were they not?
(Mr Berryman) They were indeed.
8162. When that modelling was done and in its
latest version, it was all considered, was it not, by the Rail
Regulator at the hearing that he held on 1 February of this year?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is right, it was.
8163. On the basis of that particular modelling,
what was shown was that you could accommodate what Crossrail were
seeking and some other passenger trains and make allowance for
about 357 freight paths. Do you remember that?
(Mr Berryman) I do remember that. I could not remember the
exact number, but I am bound to say that it sounds as if that
is about the right number, yes.
8164. That number of freight paths fell about
39 short of that which a number of the freight interests were
saying were necessary which was 396 freight paths to allow for
growth, so there was that shortfall if you had the full Crossrail
service which was being sought and the other trains on that state
of the modelling. Do you recollect that?
(Mr Berryman) I do recall that, but I think it is also worth
bearing in mind that the modelling also demonstrated that, with
the current infrastructure with no Crossrail and with nothing
happening, the number of freight trains which were being proposed,
the higher number that you just mentioned, could not be accommodated
with the railway that exists now, and I think that is an important
factor to bear in mind when considering what the infrastructure
works are to be constructed by Crossrail.
8165. CHAIRMAN: Now, we all know that
396 could not be accommodated as the infrastructure now stands.
Is that right?
(Mr Berryman) That is my understanding, my Lord, yes.
8166. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: Can you
give us the comparison with how many can be accommodated?
(Mr Berryman) I cannot remember the number off the top of
my head. Someone will drop me a note, I am sure, in a moment.
8167. It would be helpful to know so that we
know exactly that Crossrail is giving us more than we had. (Mr
Berryman) I think Crossrail is probably not giving more than we
had, but is maintaining the capacity which exists. If you remember,
not all the capacity that exists is—
8168. I am just trying to get a perspective
as to whether Mr George is complaining that Crossrail is going
to fall short of the ideal or whether it is not a big enough improvement
on what you have got. It is quite a big distinction.
(Mr Berryman) Yes, my Lord, I think I am right
in saying, and again we will correct this later if I am wrong,
the situation is that there is a certain limit on capacity of
the railway at present because of the infrastructure and the way
it is laid out. That is less and it would not provide for all
the growth which the Rail Freight Group and others were asking
to be accommodated. The existing railway would not accommodate
that. However, when Crossrail—
8169. I understand that. I am just asking for
the numbers.
(Mr Berryman) Well, when Crossrail is built, we will provide
at least that capacity that the existing railway provides.
8170. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: I think
rescue is coming as there is a piece of paper advancing in your
direction.
8171. MR ELVIN: What I am told is that
Crossrail would make a difference to about two of the paths, that
the impact of Crossrail would be in relation to about two paths
out of the 300-odd.
8172. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: What
does that equate to in terms of actual capacity increase? How
much of that 396 do those two paths represent? We are having difficulty.
You know these things off by heart, but we are trying to understand
what is being said here and it is very difficult when we are talking
these numbers on capacities unless you give us precise numbers.
8173. MR ELVIN: Well, it would be about
a 0.25 per cent reduction, would it not, just doing the arithmetic?
Without the infrastructure improvements, Crossrail would have
that impact, so a very minor reduction if there were no infrastructure
improvements.
(Mr Berryman) I ought to mention at this point that not all
the existing freight paths are used by a very, very wide margin.
I think only around 50 per cent are actually used now, so there
is already a 100 per cent growth capability.
8174. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: This
is quite an important aspect of it. I think we are getting less
than the clarity that I would want to hear and maybe it is because
I am more stupid than I should be, but I am just not yet getting
the precise focus on what the shortfall is.
(Mr Berryman) I think perhaps the best thing we can do, my
Lord, is draft a note overnight to explain this.
8175. MR GEORGE: My Lord, you will certainly
get this from us when we come, but I do not think I should be
giving the Committee any more evidence on this particular point.
I just want to sort of benchmark where we have got to.
8176. CHAIRMAN: I think there does not
seem to be much difficulty in counsel giving figures, but perhaps
we could get an agreed statement on this.
8177. MR GEORGE: Mr Berryman, the Rail
Regulator felt that it was appropriate that passenger services
be running at a 92 per cent figure PPM, or passenger performance
measure being what `PPM' means, although it is not actually set
out in the report, but it says `PPM' because we are all meant
to know what it is, but anyway it is a passenger performance measure.
Whether or not Crossrail think that is the perfect measure, it
is the measure that the Regulator has thought appropriate and
which you have gone along with. Is that not right?
(Mr Berryman) That is right, yes. It is, I think, fair to
say that it is the only real measure that is accepted across the
industry at the moment and I think that would be the most neutral
thing at this stage.
8178. As at the present time and as at the time
the matter was before the Regulator when the hearing was being
held, in fact the passenger services could only achieve a 71 per
cent PPM. Is that not right? We find that figure several times
appearing in the transcript of the hearing before the Regulator,
that being Network Rail's figure which no one disputed.
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct.
8179. And it was agreed by everyone around the
table that to achieve a 71 per cent PPM would be unacceptable.
Is that not right?
(Mr Berryman) That is absolutely correct. I think it would
be unacceptable to us as well as to all the other operators involved.
| 
